President Touts Social Security Reform

CARL CAMERON, Fox News:

There has been a look forward to making your proposal growing concerns among Republicans on Capitol Hill. We have Chairman Thomas last week with some concern about the process and Sen. Olympia Snow on the other side suggesting she is concerned about an absentee guarantee of benefits — excuse me.

Are you prepared today to say that those who opt into a potential private account, personal account could in fact have a guaranteed benefit as well?

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:

Here's the problem: As dictated by just math, the system will be in the red in 13 years, and in 2042, the system will be broke. That's because people are living longer and the number of people paying into the Social Security trust is dwindling.

And therefore it seems like to me, and if we wait, the longer we wait, the more expensive the solution. You know, people felt like it was the third rail of American politics. That means if you touch it, you will have political death. What you are hearing a little bit is whether or not it is worth the political price. I think it is.

REPORTER:

Mr. President, Chairman Thomas and some others on the Hill have suggested take tax reform at the same time you deal with Social Security reform and to consider alternatives such as a value-added tax to the current payroll tax for financing Social Security. Are you willing to consider combine the two big projects or do you prefer to keep them on separate tracks?

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH:

I will be a little more specific as time goes on, and perhaps at the State of the Union, talking about how to — how I think we can have a real long-term solution.

But I think it's constructive that Chairman Thomas, who will be charged with having a bill come out of the Ways and Means is thinking creatively, is willing to figure out ways to bring people along.

I look forward to a fruitful discussion of all ideas with the exception of raising the payroll tax. We have been through these kinds of questions before in my early press conferences. I can't remember exactly the questions, but I do remember the tone about people saying, "How can you possibly get tax cuts through the Congress when so and so said they shouldn't be done, or such and such said this, or this report said that or American people didn't want this?"

And so I am heartened by past experiences to believe that it is possible to do big things in Washington, D.C., and I look forward to working with members of the Congress to achieve big notable reform.

JIM LEHRER:

And back once more to Shields and Lowry.

Rich, how would you describe what the president's message was today about Social Security?

RICH LOWRY:

Well, he hit on his two main points that we are going to hear a lot going forward: one, that the current system is unsustainable and will not be there in its current form for younger workers one way or the other. And two, personal accounts offer a more attractive option for younger workers than just maintaining the current system.

And, Jim, what he is referring to there is he is going to wage a political campaign on behalf of this issue traveling the country from state to state. It's very much going to be like what he did in 2001 when people said he didn't have a mandate for his tax cuts.

He is really going to push for this, and he is going to need to because there are a lot of nervous Republicans on Capitol Hill who are explicitly waiting for him to get out front and for him to demonstrate that this issue can be sold because over the last couple of weeks, you felt some energy ebbing from the White House's position. And I think this is one reason that the president had this press conference today, is to keep out front on this issue and to keep pushing on it.

JIM LEHRER:

How did you read the message, Mark?

MARK SHIELDS:

Rich is absolutely right. There is a restlessness and restiveness in the Republican ranks, Jim, in strong supporters, Catherine Harris, for example, congresswoman from Florida, who wants to run against Bill Nelson for the Senate, and a strong White House supporter. She said she wants to be — she is going to clear anything with the AARP, she is very close to the American Association of Retired Persons, who are of course leading the opposition. She is not alone in this respect.

Comparing the vote in 2001 in favor of a tax cut to a vote in 2005 to freeze a cut in Social Security benefits is ludicrous. I mean, you know, you say the president asking me to vote to cut taxes, I'm going to do the patriotic thing, Jim and son of a gun, I'm going to do it. That's a tough one.

But as Newt Gingrich — and New Gingrich, nobody doubts his political acumen — pointed out do you really want to vote to cut Social Security benefits even, you know, in the future, scheduled benefit, upset your constituents on a crisis that is allegedly going to happen in 25 years? He mentioned that he thought this could risk the Republican majority in the House to do so. So this is the problem the president has.

JIM LEHRER:

Did you get the feeling, Rich, that the president underlined all of this with the exception as he said of capping — he didn't want to raise payroll taxes, but everything else was really on the table, maybe even personal accounts?

RICH LOWRY:

Well, no, I think personal accounts will be a bottom-line item that he wants.

But let me just clarify one thing. I didn't mean to suggest that in any way this debate was going to go the way the 2001 tax cut debate went or Mark is totally right. It is going to be harder this time around, but Bush is going to wage that sort of public campaign though.

And what you saw him doing today is sort of laying the predicate for a lot of sausage making on Capitol Hill that is going to be extremely ugly. And even the most committed carnivores are going to want to turn away in the compromises and the deals and reversals we'll see on this thing going through. And there is going to have to be a lot of flexibility on the part of supporters of personal accounts in the coming months because it is going to be hard, hard work and there will be a lot of compromises.

JIM LEHRER:

A few seconds, generally question for you Mark first, generally how the president handled himself. He doesn't do many news conferences.

MARK SHIELDS:

Eighteen in the whole administration, Jim. Jim, George Bush was a minority president in 2000, minority of the vote. Even then he was cocky and had a swagger. I thought today there was more authentic confidence in him. I think since the election he has been more authentically confident. I say that as – no one can accuse me of being an uncritical Bush admirer.

JIM LEHRER:

"Authentic confidence," Rich Lowry?

RICH LOWRY:

Yes, after the election, I don't know whether he feels more validated by an election where he actually won the popular vote or whether he feels a little liberated because he is not going to be facing the voters in that way again. But it is a much more relaxed and confident Bush. A lot more like the Bush you actually see in private.

JIM LEHRER:

All right. Thank you both very much.

RICH LOWRY:

Thank you very much.